Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
201 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi,

I've been reading a great deal into Myers Briggs and it's classifications and I find it utterly fascinating.

Right now I am focusing on the SP's which I find the most difficult to intuitively relate to.

Any other INFJ's have a particular personality type difficult to intuitively understand and why? Oh, and I don't mean which types that we just find difficult to deal with.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
409 Posts
Right now I am focusing on the SP's which I find the most difficult to intuitively relate to.

Any other INFJ's have a particular personality type difficult to intuitively understand and why?
I have read that SP's can be hard for us to relate to because they don't go deep like we (need to!) do.
I know I can have a hard time sometimes communicating with any of the sensate types, SP or SJ - their communication style can be so long and drug out, they use a lot of excess fluff to get their point across. I sometimes tune out along their long and winding road - not very nice of me, but it can get a bit tedious.
And they can find some of my abstract thoughts to be just plain strange...which is true, admittedly... it is so much more satisfying to communicate with an NT or an NF - it is just so natural and effortless. I like to go deep, and stay deep.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Interesting that you posted this. My mother is an ESFP (I thought ESFJ, until I asked her to take a version of the MBTI and read the type description), and we really cannot stand each other most of the time. She (openly) talks bad about others to people who are not related to the issue(s), and walks all over everyone else, but when she is confronted with an issue, the world stops spinning. She acts like she is the only person on the planet with feelings... but I think that is beyond the MBTI. I feel sorry for my siblings because they still have to put up with that on a daily basis. :sad:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
201 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
The xSFP's and the xSFJ's, I for some reason more readily associate F with N.

How would you outline their differences between INFJ's?

Do those 2 subtypes (SFP and SFJ) more easily associate with one another?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
409 Posts
Do those 2 subtypes (SFP and SFJ) more easily associate with one another?
From what I have read, they constitute 80% of the total population, and both are concrete in regards to communication (that is the S), whereas NT's and NF's are abstract in communication (that is the N). Supposedly they are a good match for each other, not that they can't be with anyone else, but their mode of communication is the same.
So most of the world is S, and some of us N's have a difficult time navigating in an S world.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
201 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
I see.

Using one's experiences to put context to a situation but applying their emotions or value system to evaluate it.

I can see however if a person has had a very negative emotional experience, that could colour how they see things relating to future events related to that experience.
 

·
MOTM June 2010
Joined
·
2,507 Posts
Hi,

I've been reading a great deal into Myers Briggs and it's classifications and I find it utterly fascinating.

Right now I am focusing on the SP's which I find the most difficult to intuitively relate to.

Any other INFJ's have a particular personality type difficult to intuitively understand and why? Oh, and I don't mean which types that we just find difficult to deal with.
You kind of jumped all over the place in your inquiry. First, MB has nothing to do with temperament, SP is a temperament created by Keirsey and developed more by Berens, and the final assertion is either a stereotype or an lack of understanding of the process since SPs use Ni better than NPs. Care to clarify?
 

·
MOTM June 2010
Joined
·
2,507 Posts
I have read that SP's can be hard for us to relate to because they don't go deep like we (need to!) do.
I know I can have a hard time sometimes communicating with any of the sensate types, SP or SJ - their communication style can be so long and drug out, they use a lot of excess fluff to get their point across. I sometimes tune out along their long and winding road - not very nice of me, but it can get a bit tedious.
And they can find some of my abstract thoughts to be just plain strange...which is true, admittedly... it is so much more satisfying to communicate with an NT or an NF - it is just so natural and effortless. I like to go deep, and stay deep.
LOL, I find exactly that same problem with NTs on the forums. It's a sterotype, however if you review posts even at this forum, you see that it is those who prefer intuition that have long and drug out statements. Generally sensing types use short and to the point statements.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,053 Posts
You kind of jumped all over the place in your inquiry. First, MB has nothing to do with temperament, SP is a temperament created by Keirsey and developed more by Berens, and the final assertion is either a stereotype or an lack of understanding of the process since SPs use Ni better than NPs. Care to clarify?

Hmm interesting, why is this? Are NP's more likely to use Ne?
 

·
MOTM June 2010
Joined
·
2,507 Posts
From what I have read, they constitute 80% of the total population, and both are concrete in regards to communication (that is the S), whereas NT's and NF's are abstract in communication (that is the N). Supposedly they are a good match for each other, not that they can't be with anyone else, but their mode of communication is the same.
So most of the world is S, and some of us N's have a difficult time navigating in an S world.
No, the world itself is created with SJ in mind, our instututions, how the wester culture prefers for us to behave, etc. Don't confuse social expectations with the actual population because by now everyone knows that there is no means of determining type by population since MBs theory precluded that when saying many people are born with tabula rasa, and Jung never alluded to rarity in type.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
201 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
You kind of jumped all over the place in your inquiry. First, MB has nothing to do with temperament, SP is a temperament created by Keirsey and developed more by Berens, and the final assertion is either a stereotype or an lack of understanding of the process since SPs use Ni better than NPs. Care to clarify?
As you have deduced, I am relatively new or uneducated to the entire process of Myers Briggs and any associated works. Therefore this confirms why I seemed to have "jumped" all over the place and incorrectly referenced MB with the work of Keirsey.

In regards to the second assertion in your statement, I personally would not have presented my viewpoint in such a direct and calculating manner. I would have been much more sensitive to the fact that I might be dealing with a novice seeking knowledge into personality traits. My original statement was thus interpreted by you as ignorance (with borderline stereotyping) but to myself, that was not the intent. Thus the misunderstanding portion between you and I.
 

·
MOTM June 2010
Joined
·
2,507 Posts
As you have deduced, I am relatively new or uneducated to the entire process of Myers Briggs and any associated works. Therefore this confirms why I seemed to have "jumped" all over the place and incorrectly referenced MB with the work of Keirsey.

In regards to the second assertion in your statement, I personally would not have presented my viewpoint in such a direct and calculating manner. I would have been much more sensitive to the fact that I might be dealing with a novice seeking knowledge into personality traits. My original statement was thus interpreted by you as ignorance (with borderline stereotyping) but to myself, that was not the intent. Thus the misunderstanding portion between you and I.
Sorry, I meant to say, please clarify your statement, "Right now I am focusing on the SP's which I find the most difficult to intuitively relate to."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,005 Posts
Hmm interesting, why is this? Are NP's more likely to use Ne?
If you are an ENFP or ENTP your primary cognitive function will be Ne. If you are an INFP or INTP then your secondary cognitive function will be Ne -- Ni is nowhere in their first 4 functions typically used, so it is very rare with them.

Back to the initial topic... its not accurate to put all SJ's or SP's into one category in how INFJ's deal with them. It has more to do with each individual types cognitive functions and, really, your own individual temperament.

That being said, I've dated an ISFP and ESTJ. Both very different in their own way and I got a long with each of them better in different ways. The ISFP helped me bring out my extraverted sensing to enjoy the present moment. The ESTJ was very goal-oriented and systematic... I seemed to be more emotionally developed and mature than he was. However, in both of those relationships I felt like I was the "words-of-reason". They would have an issue and want to deal with it a certain way and I'd always come in and be like "well I think you forgot about this... or maybe you should think about this... or consider this...." and, unfortunately, neither wanted to take those things I'd mention into consideration. Eventually, they both dumped me and then after the break up I discover that they are dealing with issues in result of their earlier decisions, which I expected would happen MONTHS ago. Then they come crying to me because they know I'll be empathetic. *Shakes head*.

Those with a primary and secondary Fe and Si can drive me crazy.... they do things so out of impulse on their feelings. It's soooo difficult for them to see things beyond their past experiences and feelings. Eventually, they seem to just get into a rut with age because they don't ever think that "hey, may be I should change something or use a new method". That being said, my ESTJ ex-boyfriend certain gets into ruts as well, but he simply doesn't expose his feelings and issues so readily. He liked to "cover them up" unless it was someone he once very intimate with and could trust... like myself.

I have a few ESTP friends and I get along with them great. Can't say I've ever really had any issues. I think a lot of the reason for this is because our top 4 cognitive functions are exactly the same -- they are just in reverse of each other. So what one of us is a bit weaker in, the other is a master in. ESTP's are good at getting me to "enjoy the moment" and thinking out more systematic ways of doing things in an assertive manner that I seem to have trouble with. While I help them to talk about deeper issues and challenge them to work their intuitions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
201 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Sorry, I meant to say, please clarify your statement, "Right now I am focusing on the SP's which I find the most difficult to intuitively relate to."
Our own current misunderstanding is an example. There seemed to be some kind of communicative block between us.

I am willing to explore the premise that the blockage is my doing. This post, and my recent interest in MB however, is my attempt to try and bridge the gap in my own perceptions.

I am open to further clarifications, so ask away.
 

·
MOTM June 2010
Joined
·
2,507 Posts
Hmm interesting, why is this? Are NP's more likely to use Ne?
Theoretically we use all 8 functions, just in different order. There are several theories out there, but where Jung focused on our dominant function for example Fi for ISFP, Myers-Briggs focused on our top four functions Fi-Se-Ni-Te (for ISFP).

Later theorists of both systems developed their own hierarchy of functions. John Beebe (a Jungian) says that for ISFP, the hierarchy goes: Fi-Se-Ni-Te-Fe-Si-Ne-Ti. Lenore Thomson (a MB enthusiast) says that for ISFP, it goes: Fi-Se-Ti-Fe-Si-Ne-Ni-Te keeping with Myers-Briggs' theory that the Ni and Te are the least developed. However there are flaws in this theory since Ni is the teritiary of ISFP which means third place. Also Jung says that two functions of the same make-up cannot directly oppose one another, therefore Thomson has Ti too high on her chart. So, most likely Beebe's theory is correct.

So yes, ISPs use Ni as it's third function (only higher developed in INJs and ENJs) and lets say INPs use it as their 6th function.
 

·
MOTM June 2010
Joined
·
2,507 Posts
If you are an ENFP or ENTP your primary cognitive function will be Ne. If you are an INFP or INTP then your secondary cognitive function will be Ne -- Ni is nowhere in their first 4 functions typically used, so it is very rare with them.

Back to the initial topic... its not accurate to put all SJ's or SP's into one category in how INFJ's deal with them. It has more to do with each individual types cognitive functions and, really, your own individual temperament.

That being said, I've dated an ISFP and ESTJ. Both very different in their own way and I got a long with each of them better in different ways. The ISFP helped me bring out my extraverted sensing to enjoy the present moment. The ESTJ was very goal-oriented and systematic... I seemed to be more emotionally developed and mature than he was. However, in both of those relationships I felt like I was the "words-of-reason". They would have an issue and want to deal with it a certain way and I'd always come in and be like "well I think you forgot about this... or maybe you should think about this... or consider this...." and, unfortunately, neither wanted to take those things I'd mention into consideration. Eventually, they both dumped me and then after the break up I discover that they are dealing with issues in result of their earlier decisions, which I expected would happen MONTHS ago. Then they come crying to me because they know I'll be empathetic. *Shakes head*.

Those with a primary and secondary Fe and Si can drive me crazy.... they do things so out of impulse on their feelings. It's soooo difficult for them to see things beyond their past experiences and feelings. Eventually, they seem to just get into a rut with age because they don't ever think that "hey, may be I should change something or use a new method". That being said, my ESTJ ex-boyfriend certain gets into ruts as well, but he simply doesn't expose his feelings and issues so readily. He liked to "cover them up" unless it was someone he once very intimate with and could trust... like myself.

I have a few ESTP friends and I get along with them great. Can't say I've ever really had any issues. I think a lot of the reason for this is because our top 4 cognitive functions are exactly the same -- they are just in reverse of each other. So what one of us is a bit weaker in, the other is a master in. ESTP's are good at getting me to "enjoy the moment" and thinking out more systematic ways of doing things in an assertive manner that I seem to have trouble with. While I help them to talk about deeper issues and challenge them to work their intuitions.
Thanks Candance, and I think this confirms my response to Blue Heart in post #9 :happy:
 

·
MOTM June 2010
Joined
·
2,507 Posts
Our own current misunderstanding is an example. There seemed to be some kind of communicative block between us.

I am willing to explore the premise that the blockage is my doing. This post, and my recent interest in MB however, is my attempt to try and bridge the gap in my own perceptions.

I am open to further clarifications, so ask away.
You said, "..... I find (SP) the most difficult to intuitively relate to.", but you provide no examples and did not elaborate on how you " find it difficult to intuitively relate to" us. Since all types use all 8 functions and SPs have a greater use of Ni than Ne types? Are you inferring that Ni and Ne are the same thing? Do you have just as arduous time intuiting with Ne types as well? Did you make that statement based on your understanding of type theory, or was it prejudicial? You made a statement and I am just asking you to clarify. Not sure why you choose to find it hard to communicate with me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
201 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
If I indicated that "I do not understand cars"... the generality of that statement could encompass many things but does not reflect prejudicial views.

You are clearly are well versed in MB et al and head and shoulders above my own understanding. Understand your audience and their needs before you begin digging into specifics.

What are you trying to accomplish here?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
409 Posts
Functianalyst;275145 Generally sensing types use short and to the point statements.[/quote said:
That is true, however my experience has been that they can use said statements over and over to get their point across. For example, in talking about this with an ISTJ friend, he stated that he is actually processing what he is thinking as he is speaking, so sometimes he needs to say the same things over and over again. That helped me to understood that that is his mode of communication, not an effort to berate or anything else.

It sounds as if I have touched a nerve with some people - it is not my intention to put anyone down, I simply give my personal experience, along with what I have read about the subject. Other people's experience may be different. But in general in reading the posts from numerous NF's on this forum, it is a common thread that many NF's find communication misunderstandings with many people.

In regards to the difficulty of being on a forum that is mostly NF's, I have to say that for some of us, because we are such a tiny minority and we may not know any in person, it is such a relief to have a place to communicate with others that have the same communication style.
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top